[secdir] [new-work] WG Review: Recharter of Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)

[IESG Secretary <[e-mail]>]

A modified charter has been submitted for the Locator/ID Separation 
Protocol (lisp) working group in the Internet Area of the IETF.  The 
IESG has not made any determination as yet.  The modified charter is 
provided below for informational purposes only.  Please send your 
comments to the IESG mailing list ([e-mail]) by Thursday, January 
26, 2012

Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)
-------------------------------------
Current Status: Active
Last updated: 2012-01-19

 Chairs:
     Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>
     Terry Manderson <[e-mail]>

 Internet Area Directors:
     Ralph Droms <[e-mail]>
     Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>

 Internet Area Advisor:
     Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>

 Secretaries:
     Wassim Haddad <[e-mail]>
     Luigi Iannone <[e-mail]>

 Mailing Lists:
     General Discussion: [e-mail]
     To Subscribe:       https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
     Archive:            http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp/current/maillist.html

Description of Working Group:

The IAB's October 2006 Routing and Addressing Workshop (RFC 4984)
rekindled interest in scalable routing and addressing architectures for
the Internet. Among the many issues driving this renewed interest are
concerns about the scalability of the routing system. Since the IAB
workshop, several proposals have emerged which attempt to address the
concerns expressed there and elsewhere. In general, these proposals are
based on the "locator/identifier separation".

The basic idea behind the separation is that the Internet architecture
combines two functions, routing locators, (where you are attached to the
network) and identifiers (who you are) in one number space: The IP
address. Proponents of the separation architecture postulate that
splitting these functions apart will yield several advantages, including
improved scalability for the routing system. The separation aims to
decouple locators and identifiers, thus allowing for efficient
aggregation of the routing locator space and providing persistent
identifiers in the identifier space.

LISP requires no changes to end-systems or to most routers. LISP aims
for an incrementally deployable protocol.

A number of approaches are being looked at in parallel in other
contexts. The IRTF RRG examined several proposals, some of which were
published as IRTF-track Experimental RFCs.

The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol, completing
the ongoing work, and any items which directly impact LISP protocol
structures and are related to using LISP for improving Internet routing
scalability. Specifically, the group will work on:

- LISP security threats and solutions
- MIBs
- deployment models
- allocation of EID space
- alternate mapping system designs

In addition, if work chartered in some other IETF WG requires changes
in the LISP base protocol or any items which directly impact LISP
protocol structures, then the LISP WG is chartered to work on such
changes.

The working group will encourage and support interoperable LISP
implementations as well as defining requirements for alternate mapping
systems. The Working Group will also develop security profiles for LISP
and the various LISP mapping systems.

It is expected that the results of specifying, implementing, and testing
LISP will be fed to the general efforts at the IETF and IRTF to
understand which type of a solution is optimal. The LISP WG is not
chartered to develop a standard solution for solving the routing
scalability problem at this time. The specifications developed by the WG
are Experimental and labeled with accurate disclaimers  about their
limitations and not fully understood implications for Internet traffic.
In addition, as these issues are understood, the working group will
analyze and document the implications of LISP on Internet traffic,
applications, routers, and security. This analysis will explain what
role LISP can play in scalable routing. The analysis should also look at
scalability and levels of state required for encapsulation,
decapsulation, liveness, and so on as well as the manageability and
operability of LISP. Specifically, the group will work on:

- documenting areas that need experimentation
- summarizing the results of implementation, experiments, and deployment
  experience
- describing the implications of employing LISP
- operational guidance for using LISP

Goals and Milestones

Jun 2012    Forward draft-ietf-lisp-mib to the IESG
Jun 2012    Forward draft-ietf-lisp-sec to the IESG
Jun 2012    Forward to the IESG an operational document which should
            include cache management and ETR synchronization
            techniques (draft-ietf-lisp-deployment).
Oct 2012    Forward to the IESG a document providing a solution
                   to replay issues with Map-Register/Map-Notify
Dec 2013    Publish an example cache management specification.
Dec 2013    Forward to the IESG an evaluation of the security threat to
            cache maintenance (draft-ietf-lisp-threats)
Dec 2013    Forward to the IESG a document addressing the areas which
            require further experimentation.
Jun 2014    Evaluate the applicability and coverage for LISP from a
            reuse of SIDR technology.
Jun 2014    Summarize results of specifying, implementing, and testing
            LISP and forward to IESG and/or IRTF.
Jun 2014    Analyze and document the implications of LISP deployments in
            Internet topologies and forward to IESG for publication.
Dec 2014    Re-charter or close


_______________________________________________
new-work mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work